Dues & views

We are currently undergoing updates to our site and are working to improve your experience on all devices that you use throughout your day. If you should find a page or a story that is not working correctly, please click here.

Thank you for your patience,

TribLIVE.com Team

The SEIU's “purple wave” that demands union rights is crashing up against a jetty of rank-and-file members in California. They're protesting waste and corruption in their union and demanding access to financial records.

The workers' website (occupyseiu.com) says members of the Service Employees International Union see “waste every day” in the 2 million-member labor union. A recent protest outside the SEIU's headquarters was met by union officials asking participants how much they were being “paid.” (Protesters said they were there on their own time.)

The protesters also said they were videotaped by union bosses for a “blacklist.” That's the treatment alleged by SEIU member Mariam Noujaim, who says in a lawsuit that she was shut out after she reported suspicious voting at an SEIU election.

The members' protest also follows this summer's 15-count indictment against Tyrone Freeman, cited by the Los Angeles Times as a “rising star” in the national labor movement and head of California's largest union local. This so-called “advocate for the disadvantaged” is accused of stealing from SEIU workers to enrich himself.

The SEIU is no friend of workers. By law, workers should have the right to choose their representation and not be forced into SEIU locals that demand their dues but ignore their views.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our
Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent
via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.